>I have an idea. Why don't you invite Steve [Austin] to this forum to debate the
>geological points with Steve Schimmrich and I? I would suggest that you
>extend the invite so he doesn't feel threatened. It has always struck me
>as odd that the leaders in the C/E field always seem to avoid forums like
>this. They almost never post anything so it can be publically critiqued.
>This does not give a good appearance. Go look at the more scientific
>forums in Usenet and you will find all sorts of authors and leaders in
>their field. Hubert Yockey has posted to Talk.Origins. But the YEC
>leaders never leave controlled environments.
Is the GSA annual meeting a controlled environment?
The last time I talked with Steve, a few weeks ago, he didn't use
the Internet, and has no plans to start any time soon. Given the
exceedingly ephemeral nature of most of what appears on Usenet
news groups -- grandstanding, hairsplitting, abuse, ridicule,
sheer lunacy -- I can't say that I blame Steve. Talk.origins,
for instance, is a repetitious stream of tedium and rubbish broken
by the rare insightful or informative post.
BTW, I disagree completely that any "leader" in evolutionary biology
posts to talk.origins. The only possible exception is Deaddog
[Andrew Ellington at Indiana], and he hasn't been there for some
months now.
>I would suggest that if Steve is worried about his time, that we
>limit it to a 3 or 4 week debate. That way it is long enough to have
>substance but not so long as to tie Steve up for a long time.
>
>Will he do it? I doubt it very seriously.
So do I, but not for what I'm guessing are the reasons you would offer.
"Waste of time," rather, springs to mind. For those who want to ask Steve
about his books or articles, he's only a first class stamp away.
Paul Nelson